[Standards] Deprecating Message Archiving

Florian Schmaus flo at geekplace.eu
Wed Sep 21 08:16:44 UTC 2016

 think the major difference is that there is very likely consensus that a
disclaimer should be added to Message Archiving, while I don't think that's
also true for deprecating it.

I also believe that we should do more to guide users towards the
"encouraged" protocols. We have this situation not only for MAM. I'm
thankful that you took the initiative here. Let's start by finding a
wording for the disclaimer and add the disclaimer to the Message Archiving
XEP. We can still deprecate it after this first step is done.

- Florian

On Sep 19, 2016 22:00, "Sam Whited" <sam at samwhited.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Florian Schmaus <flo at geekplace.eu>
> wrote:
> > That said, I suggest adding a disclaimer to Message Archiving
> > stating that new installations should consider MAM instead.
> What is the difference between that and just deprecating Message
> Archiving? Isn't that effectively what you're doing by adding a
> disclaimer?
> New implementations are encouraged to use MAM, and implementations
> that specifically need message archiving for some reason will use it
> regardless of the disclaimer (or the deprecated status)
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Matthew Wild <mwild1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Agree. Also there are things that XEP-0136 supports that XEP-0313
> > intentionally doesn't, but I've encountered people who really really
> > want those things. It has parallels to the XEP-0016 vs. XEP-0191
> > debate :)
> >
> > In theory you could have both archive protocols accessing the same
> > store (with some limitations)
> I don't think deprecating it will stop people who specifically need
> those features, it will just stop new implementations that could use
> MAM from accidentally implementing an old technology that no one uses.
> In my mind it just comes down to: "What does the XSF want to recommend
> for new implementations of `history`?" And I think the answer is
> clearly MAM. Having anything else that also appears recommended will
> just confuse people.
> —Sam
> --
> Sam Whited
> pub 4096R/54083AE104EA7AD3
> _______________________________________________
> Standards mailing list
> Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
> Unsubscribe: Standards-unsubscribe at xmpp.org
> _______________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20160921/2e591a78/attachment.html>

More information about the Standards mailing list